2019 Supreme(Chh) 844
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Goutam Bhaduri, J.
INDIAN CHURCH COUNCIL OF DISCIPLES OF CHRIST THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY A.D. JAMES - APPELLANT
Versus
KRISHNA KUMAR AGRAWAL - RESPONDENT
Revision Petition No. 180 of 2018
Decided On : 12-09-2019
Fouzia Mirza, Adv., H.S. Ahluwalia, Adv., Rahul Jha, Adv., Anand Mohan Tiwari, Adv., S.C. Verma, Adv., N.L. Soni, Adv., R.N. Singh, Adv., Shashank Thakur, Adv., Akshay Pawar, Adv.
Headnote:
Society Registration Act,1973 - Section 21 – Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 1 Rule 9 - Order 1 Rule 10 CPC - Order 1 Rule 10(2) - Petition filed by Indian Church Council of Disciples of Christ through his secretary and another applicant against non applicants for review of a judgment and decree - Decree was passed on basis of compromise entered between parties in First Appeal out of them one of party is a registered society - In first appeal Krishna Kumar Agrawal was appellant and respondents were Rev. N.L. Soni - Another person claiming as Executive Secretary named A.D. James, whereas non applicants Krishna Kumar Agrawal is arrayed as non-applicant No.1 - Held, On the basis of compromise in between parties in first appeal, decree was drawn - Instant review petition has been filed by Society represented by another person claiming as Executive Secretary whereas nonapplicants is arrayed as non-applicant No.1 and non-applicant No.2 - Court when examined & applied as against documents filed along with application it drives to draw an inference that Krishna Kumar Agrawal received a substantial amount and entered into agreement with applicant herein but subsequently tried to take over property by suppression of facts solely by entering into compromise –Circumstances and documents would show that substantial part of interest was created that of applicant over property in suit - In order to avoid all multiplicity of the proceedings, Court has already recalled order passed under compromise decree by review as it was outcome of fraud - So as to safeguard further proceeding of first appeal and to avoid any further fraud and to avoid multiplicity of proceeding in future, application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by is allowed - Sushil Kumar be added as a respondent in first appeal - Appeal Allowed.
JUDGMENT
Goutam Bhaduri, J. - This order would adjudicate review petition filed by the Indian Church Council of the Disciples of Christ (hereinafter referred to as 'the ICCDC') through his secretary A.D. James and another applicant Rev. A Nanthaniel against the nonapplicants for review of a judgment and decree dated 01.10.2018. The said decree was passed on the basis of compromise entered between the parties in the First Appeal No.24/1993 out of them one of the party is a registered society under the Society Registration Act,1973. In the first appeal Krishna Kumar Agrawal was the appellant and the respondents were Rev. N.L. Soni, arrayed in capacity of Executive Secretary, Indian Church Council of the disciples of Christ as respondent No.1 and the respondent No.2 was the Indian Church Council of the Disciples of Christ a society registered under the Society Registered under the Society Registration Act,1973 The society was also represented by its Executive Secretary Rev. N.L. Soni, Bilaspur, who was a respondent No.1. On the basis of compromise in between the parties in the first appeal, the decree was drawn. The instant review petition has been filed by the Society namely Indian Church Council of the Disciples of Christ represented by another person claiming as Executive Secretary named A.D. James, whereas the nonapplicants Krishna Kumar Agrawal is arrayed as non-applicant No.1 and Rev. N.L. Soni as non-applicant No.2.
2. Ms. Fouzia Mirza, learned counsel for the applicants in the instant review petition would submit that the property of ICCDC have been sought to be done away with at the behest of Rev. N.L. Soni, who claimed himself to be the Executive Secretary of Society. She would further submit that a fraud has been played on the Court as N.L. Soni claimed himself to be the Executive Secretary as has entered into compromise whereas he is not the Secretary. The reference of Annexure A/5 was made and would submit that N.L. Soni, who claimed to be the Executive Secretary was expelled from ICCDC. It is stated that though the authority was claimed on the basis of resolution dated 27.05.2005 but even that resolution did not give the power to N.L. Soni to enter into any compromise in respect of property of Society which was subject of dispute. It is stated that N.L. Soni did not bring into the notice of this Court that N.L. Soni had no right to enter into the compromise on behalf of the Society. She further refers to the affidavit of pastor Anurag Nathaniel, Ujiyar Masih, V.N. Bhelwa and it is stated that compromise was arrived at on the basis of the resolution dated 27.05.2005 and that too is outcome of fraud and Mr. N.L. Soni have played fraud with the entire christian community. She would further submit that Rev. A. Nathaniel and four others have filed a writ petition in the year 2018 to register the FIR against N.L. Soni and further paper publication dated 19th of August 2018 was referred and would submit that the public notice was made in paper that N.L. Soni committing fraud on the earlier occasion too tried to do away with the property of the society and public was notified about the fraudulent acts of N.L. Soni. She would further submit that therefore, facts would show that a dispute exists in between the members of the society and N.L. Soni therefore tried to take advantage of the same.
3. The document one publication filed along with the rejoinder is also referred which is Annexure RJ/2 dated 26th August 2018 a public notice published by N.L. Soni, to show counter allegations have been made by N.L. Soni. Likewise, Annexure RJ/3 another publication was referred by the applicants that on 05.09.2018 a paper publication was made against N.L. Soni about his activities of fraud. She would further submit that therefore serious dispute exists in between the parties. It is further stated that a complaint was made as Annexure RJ/4 on 09.08.2018 to the Registrar, Firms and Societies and submits that, even if without prejudice it i